High Court Directs Bihar DGP To Conduct Inquiry On Allegations Of Assault On Advocate Inside Police Station

The Patna High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP), Bihar to conduct an inquiry into the alleged assault of an advocate by a policeman at Mokama Police Station.Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad directed, “Let this matter be brought to the notice of the Director General of Police, State of Bihar who is expected to review the entire matter and order appropriate inquiry by a competent officer not attached to the concerned Police Station in any capacity and such inquiry into the matter be conducted within a period of six weeks from today. A report submitted in course of such inquiry be brought to the notice of this Court with an affidavit by 23rd of February, 2024.”The above direction came in a plea filed by one Anand Gaurav, who is himself an Advocate Practicing at Bar, seeking an appropriate inquiry into the matter by a competent authority.A First Information Report (FIR) was registered against Gaurav alleging that he had tried to snatch the pistol of the sub-inspector (respondent) of Mokama Police Station. The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire allegations in the FIR were false, concocted, and baseless, and the allegations were made in such a way that it gave a very serious view of the matter. The Counsel contended that the CCTV footage at the police station would prove that the petitioner was actually a victim in the case and was assaulted by the respondent.The petitioner further alleged that in order to save himself from being implicated in lodging a false case, the sub-inspector ensured that the relevant CCTV footage of the said date and time was deleted. It was stated that at this stage CCTV footage was not available and the investigation of the case cannot be completed without verification of the CCTV footage of the thana premises. The Counsel emphasized that the investigation had been pending for more than two years without any progress.The counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was a case of mala fide prosecution and it would be crystal clear if the Court gave him an opportunity to play an audio clip of the conversation between the petitioner and the sub-inspector before the alleged occurrence. In the said audio clip in which conversation was recorded on the mobile of the petitioner, the Counsel informed that the sub-inspector could be clearly heard demanding bribes and his share in all such cases in which vehicles have been ordered to be released by the court.With permission from the Court, the counsel for the petitioner produced the audio clip contained in a pen drive which was played in the courtroom in the presence of the counsel for the State and the members of the Bar.Upon hearing the clip the Court observed, “If the audio clip is correct, there is a voice from the other side demanding bribe from the petitioner, however, this audio clip is required to be identified and voice test shall also be required to investigate on this aspect of the matter.”Accordingly, the Court issued a notice to the respondent and the Superintendent of Police (SP) on 21.12.2023.In the subsequent hearing, on 11.01.2024, the Court was informed by the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Patna that the case filed by the petitioner against the respondent was true, while the case lodged against the petitioner by the sub-inspector was ordered to be closed for want of evidence. Further, the SP directed the Investigating Officer to submit a final form as “not charge sheeted for want of evidence”. While noting that the CCTV footage was now not available, the Court asserted, "it is apparent on the face of the entire facts that people who were getting implicated because of the presence of the recording of the entire occurrence in the CCTV footage have ensured that the same is not preserved. If the allegations made in the petition, as are now appearing prima-facie correct, are ultimately found true, the petitioner would also be entitled for compensation.”The Court will now hear the matter next on February 23.Appearance:For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Kumar Shanu, AdvocateFor the Respondent/s: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma, AAG-III, Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-IIICase No.: Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1081 of 2023Case Title: ANAND GAURAV vs The State of BiharClick here to Read/ Download Order Dated 21-12-2023Click here to Read/ Download Order Dated 11-01-2024

High Court Directs Bihar DGP To Conduct Inquiry On Allegations Of Assault On Advocate Inside Police Station

Bhavya Singh

Tags